tabletalk

Lewis For Lent 2: A Welcome Into the Heart of Things

“But we pine. The sense that in this universe we are treated as strangers, the longing to be acknowledged, to meet with some response, to bridge some chasm that yawns between us and reality, is part of our inconsolable secret. And surely, from this point of view,, the promise of glory, in the sense described,, become highly relevant to our deep desire. For glory means good report with God, acceptance by God, response, acknowledgment, and welcome into the heart of things. The door upon which we have been knocking all our lives will open at last.” The Weight of Glory p. 40-41

Giving things up for Lent. I’ve never been very good at it. It almost always resulted in a trivial act. By trivial I mean it was always about me losing weight, or eating healthy or going to bed on time or reading the right things so I will feel better about my life. It almost always resulted in what Lewis described at the beginning of his sermon, The Weight of Glory, “as if my abstinence [and my happiness] and not others’ happiness” was the important point Many times we Christians stop in our development at what we get from God, rather than what God intends to do through us.

Lewis at this point of the sermon, touches on a very real intuition – “The sense that in this universe we are treated as strangers….” And this being “part of our inconsolable secret.” The we, Lewis refers to, is all of us - humanity. We are all longing to be acknowledged, to be met with a response, to know we are part of an ultimate reality that takes us seriously. When the door to Christ is opened we are no longer strangers to the universe, to God, to each other or ourselves. We fit in. We are part of something bigger.

When we become aware that God in Christ regards us, acknowledges us, meets us and makes us part of an eternal reality that he has created, we also become aware that it is not just for us, but for US! The bigger ‘US’ called humanity. We become aware that our invitation to come through the door is not merely to feel good about being insiders. Our inclusion is all about coming and going through that door. To go out and meet those who are still strangers and regard them, pay attention to them, to include them in the same way that God has included us. We share the glory of God, cast upon our lives, with those around us. We show people the door….not to usher them out but usher them in. We want to extend “a welcome into the heart of things” as Lewis says.

Lewis for Lent 1

"If you asked twenty good men [people] today what they thought the highest of the virtues, nineteen of them would reply, Unselfishness. But if you had asked almost any of the great Christians of old he would have replied, Love. You see what has happened? A negative term has been substituted for a positive, and this is of more than philological importance. The negative ideal of Unselfishness carries with it the suggestion not primarily of securing good things for others, but of going without them ourselves, as if our abstinence and not their happiness was the important point. I do not think this is the Christian virtue of Love. The New Testament has a lot to say about self-denial, but not about self-denial as an end in itself." C.S. Lewis - The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses, 2001 Harper Collins San Francisco p. 25-25 - The opening words of the sermon.

I find myself in more and more conversations where this statement by Lewis is most relevant. Many in our time believe the Christian faith to be about denying people things. We deny them fun, approval, attention, even heaven itself. We withhold and withdraw. We become a people who hold on to God’s love as though it were a possession not an action.

Aristotle defined a prodigal as one who has wasted their substance. We see this clearly in Luke 15. The flip side of that same coin is the story of the elder brother. It seems that the religious problem is not in wasting our substance but in withholding it. This is one of Jesus’ points. You can be outside of what God desires for humanity by wasting what you have. You can also be outside of it by withholding your resources from others.

In this time of Lent, it is especially significant that we understand that our abstinence is all about securing “good things” for others. When we “give up” our time, our energies, our safety, our ‘fill-in-the-blank’, we do it with an eye to what we can do for others. I can lower my grocery bill by clipping coupons. Does it result in greater generosity?

Love, like Faith, is a verb, not a possession. It is an action to be taken, not a commodity to collect. Let’s consider how to “do good things” in this season that leads up to Easter, so that others will give glory to God.

Missional Church: A Field Guide - Unmasking Principalities and Powers

I believe this is one of the most understated roles of the church. Partly because the church has to risk its very life to do this. For me, most mega-churches ride the wave of cultural acceptability. They rarely risk unmasking the "prevailing plausibility structures" which is how Newbigin describes the principalities and powers. What most culturally driven congregations do is baptize the prevailing culture and say something like, "You just need to add Jesus to your life and it will all make sense." The key here is that culture isn't questioned, and the only thing missing is a spiritual component that will "round out" a person's life - meaning and fulfillment will follow.

The irony is it fails to ask anyone to give up anything (except for money to build the facilities that give the impression of success!) I have a friend that would like to challenge the title of a book "From Success to Significance". He would like the next book to skip the 'significance' stage and move straight from success to sacrifice. It think Jon's right. It isn't until we unmask the things that have power to shape and guide culture and us, that we will begin to demonstrate the power of the Gospel.

Many have said that our wealth masks our needs. It gives us a false sense of security. It is true that our current economic situation is unmasking the false promises of false gods.

The church needs to consider doing this intentionally, not merely accidentally. That is we need to say no to those things that give us security and value and importance that are not born in God. We also need to unmask the motives of holding power and influence in our seemingly spiritual acts. The reason my friend suggests that we need to skip the significance part of the above equation is that we can still use all our manipulative and power holding skills to move ahead a very spiritual agenda, and God can be no where in sight. The means are the end for true spiritual success. So we need to give up our own powerful means so that God's means can be seen clearly.

I did a research project some years ago. In it I asked if preaching shaped the missional practices and character of newly forming congregations. The surprise wasn't that it did, but how much it did. The most interesting part of the research to me, however, was that what 'wasn't preached' equally had an effect on the church. In those congregations where social justice and prophetic challenges were absent, so were justice practices and prophetic actions. What we don't say speaks volumes.

At this point it is Paul's admonition in 2 Corinthians that informs me. "We have this treasure in fragile clay vessels to prove that this light doesn't come from us, but comes from God."

Principalities (princely or governing powers) and powers (culture shaping energy, say like advertising or nationalism), that tell us "the way things are" can only be unmasked when we demonstrate that they are wrong. We do this in weakness and reliance. We do this in brokenness and vulnerability. We get there through tragedy and sacrifice and identifying our lives more closely with those who have not, than those who have.

Why else do you think Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem? Jesus unmasked the principalities and powers in his incarnation. We need to get inside Jesus' life and live there.

Vulnerability for Real

A friend of mine has asked me to make the last few blogs more intelligible.  OK.  Sometimes I get ahead of myself and write in order to think out-loud.  These are not completed or even good thoughts.  They are simply thoughts and deserve all the critique or disinterest they can muster.

Vulnerability.  Am I open to having my thoughts and positions truly questioned?  This is the initial posture we need to adopt in order to have a true conversation.  My guess is that most of us are intellectually honest and would nod in agreement if asked we were open to being challenged.  And I would conclude that most of us would be lying to ourselves and others.  It is what Alasdair McIntyre writes in his book "After Virtue", we don't really know why we hold our positions and therefore can't enter into a conversation without it getting shrill.  The reason?  We lack the ability to consider our position from many angles because we hold it from a very narrow perspective.

In the constitution of the Presybterian Church (USA) we say that we will undertake the ministry God gives us even at the risk of losing the church we know.  It's a great statement.  It is also merely a theory for most of us.  We are all trying to preserve what we have.

To be able to address the issues before our denomination we need to be truly vulnerable from all sides.  The problem is that we don't trust everyone to be willing to be vulnerable at this level.  So we hedge our bets. 

The cure?  Trust.  Trust God for the future.  Trust God for the present.  Our task is to trust that the church is Christ's not ours.  One or both or all sides need to risk losing their claim.  This means we need to have our positions open to real scrutiny. This is the heretical imperative at work. 

The first step - true vulnerability.  I don't know what it looks like just yet, but together maybe we can figure it out.

Loving America

I have traveled quite a bit.  Little by some standards and a lot by other standards.  I love meeting people all over the world.  I'm getting antsy to get out and about.  But no matter how long I'm gone, I do enjoy coming home to the United States.  For all its flaws it is the place that allows for the most freedoms and makes room for me to hold my opinions without reprisal.

Bill Bishop in his book "The Big Sort" says this:

"The country may be more diverse than ever coast to coast.  But look around: our own streets are filled with people who live alike, think alike, and vote alike.  This social transformation didn't happen by accident.  We have built a country where everyone can choose the neighborhood (and church and news shows) most compatible with his or her lifestyle and beliefs.  And we are living with the consequences of this segregation by way of life: pockets of like-minded citizens that have become so ideologically inbred that we don't know, can't understand, and can barely conceive of 'those people' who live just a few miles away."

One of the ironies is that the freedom we enjoy, love and take for granted, is the very freedom that makes it possible to ignore and deride one another.  As we seek to associate with those who are like us, we lose touch with the majority of people we need to meet and get along with.  Every time we refer to "those people" we get further away from the American ideal of a united people.  Even more significant is that we get further away from God's vision for us to be "one people" in Christ. (see Bob Pearson's comment on the Big Sort article earlier.)

By sticking to "people like us" we become impoverished.  The Statue of Liberty has been a symbol for our country of our willingness to be an inclusive people.  Let's go further than being inclusive and love America.  Not the flag, or the rules, or the ideals.  They can become vague symbols that have no reality.  But let's love America the people.  This will put us in community with those whose ideologies and orientations and opinions challenge our own.  It will make us vulnerable to other thoughts and ways of living.  But isn't that the point?

Questions From Without: Hell and Reading the Bible

Anytime someone reads the Bible they come to it with a set of expectations. Every single person brings prejudices, insights, wisdom, ignorance, good methods and bad to reading the Bible. Many times in our 21st century existence we forget that there are 20 centuries between us and those who wrote the texts we read. Often we simply lift the texts out, transporting them over the centuries into our modern existence without any translation or context. This can cause us to go horribly wrong in our interpretations. We all want it to speak to us. Often all of these expectations and methodologies end up keeping us from understanding. Every approach has its limits. There is no "right way" to read the scriptures. But there are better ways to read it than ohters. This requires great discernment and good mentors and a lot of honesty.

We are going to look at a way of reading the passages on Hell, suggested by Brian McLaren in chapter 19 "Homework Assignment" in The Last Word and the Word After That. It's a method that I believe allows us to let the passages to speak for themselves. This is Lewis's point, let the text speak and learn from it without imposing your expectations and needs on it. We can't do this perfectly but we can approximate it. Here is McLaren's method:

"Make a table with four columns, headed 'Passage,' 'Behavior,' 'Consequence,' and 'Point.' Read through Matthew, and note each passage that deals wit the subject of judgment (not just the passages that explicitly mention hell of Gehenna or Hades). Then note the behavior that will be judged, along with the consequence that follows that behavior. Then try to identify the point: what is the rhetorical purpose of the passage?
Here's what I think you'll find.
1. Our contemporary modern Western conservative Protestant gospel would say this:
Behavior: Not accepting Jesus Christ as personal savior, not being saved or born again, not asking Jesus
into your heart so your sins can be forgiven, etc.
Consequence: Being sent to hell.
Point: Accept Jesus as your personal Savior.
2. Not one passage from the Gospels says anything remotely like this."

We're going to use this method. If you would like to try it on your own that would be exceptional, but if you trust McLaren not to misquote the scripture, then we'll simply use his table from the above chapter.

The next few blogs will look at how this works. One of the things to know is how the people of Jesus' day viewed hell. Each of the principle religious groups of Jesus' time had a different way of approaching this concept. Hell was in no way accepted by all the religious people of that time. It took centuries for it to become something like what we have today. Remember we can't simply understand a text in our own time without understanding it first in Jesus' time. We will need to know how the Sadducees look at a text and how the Pharisees would view it. There are other groups like the Herodians and more. So I will comment on them as their views are addressed in different texts.

The hard thing for us is to set aside our agendas so we can listen to the biblical agenda. Wouldn't it be best to get close to what God wants of us, rather than to make God get close to what we want?

PBS Discussion on Moral Values

Dr. Mouw is the President of Fuller Theological Seminary.  If you're interested in the discussion you'll enjoy his thoughts. 

Jan. 7 -- Dr. Mouw is on the PBS Tavis Smiley Show for a special program
focusing on Morality in America.   This half-hour show airs at 11:00 p.m. in
Los Angeles and at various times throughout the country (please check local
times).  Dr. Mouw is part of a panel discussion including Rev. Chip Murray,
retired pastor of First AME Church in Los Angeles; Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor
of Tikkun Magazine; and Bishop Vashti Murphy McKenzie, president of the AME
Church Council of Bishops.

Advent Morality

This week I'm preaching on the "Magnificat" the song that Mary sings in the presence of her kinswoman Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist. This song is modeled after the song of Hannah in Samuel.  It is a fascinating view into the Gospel of Luke and into the very character of God.  Again, what we value ought to be what God values.  Luke is often about the reversal of fortune.  Mary sets the table.

We have held a class at our church over the years called "Discover the World."  It has been a training for people wanting to go on short-term missions from our congregation.  One of the early points in the class is the following: "If you want to know God's will for your life, find out what God is doing in the world and come alongside it."  Good guidance.

Fred Craddock in his commentary on Luke says of Mary's song, "So sure is the singer that God will do what is promised that it is proclaimed as accomplished fact."  After a brief thanksgiving for her own circumstance, Mary sings about what God is intending to do in the world in the sure confidence that it is what God is doing now.

Here is what Mary sings about what God is doing: The proud are scattered in their own thoughts; the powerful are brought down from their thrones and the lowly are lifted up; the rich are sent away empty and the hungry are filled with good things. God will help his people those who fear [reverence] him from generation to generation.  (find all this in Luke 1:46-56)

If I want to know God's will for my life, then I need to recognize where the above things are taking place or about to take place and come alongside what God is doing.  In some funny sense these are sacramental places - visible expressions of an invisible grace.  Where do we see the proud needing to be humbled?  Where are the poor who need to be lifted up?  Where are the hungry that need to be fed?  Where are the rich who need to be made empty so they can be filled with God instead of mammon? 

I've read with some disappointment the effort that some Christians are putting in to making sure that retailers make mention of a Merry Christmas as though this is the heart of the Gospel. Jesus doesn't need endorsements from marketers.  Jesus needs us to be a reverant and attentive people.  Mary's song tells Christians where to find God.  She is a great disciple. She sees and she welcomes God into her own life and rejoices at what he has done and will do. 

Those who have eyes to see...

Beyond the Manger

I have found the publishing of a series on moral values a bit daunting and it has taken me back a few steps. It is too significant a topic for me to blog casually.  I intend to follow up with the series in relation to the Sermon on the Mount.  But I want to share a little more personally this time out.

Currently I am preaching and teaching from the Gospel of Luke.  One of the fine commentaries on this is a new series by N.T. Wright.  It is his "For Everyone" series that is destined to be the contemporary replacement of William Barclay's time honored The Daily Bible Studies Series.  "Luke for Everyone" is truly helpful for disciples of any stage in their walk.

The story of the birth of Jesus in Luke 2 has everything to do with what we value.  In the birth of Jesus, Luke tells us that we can expect God's Kingdom to be in complete contradiction to the kingdoms of this world.  The contrasts between how the kingdoms of the world function and the Kingdom of God couldn't be more clear and spread throughout the Gospel of Luke. 

When we mention a phrase like, "The Kingdom of God," it means quite literally, the "Rule of God."  That is, God being in charge of lives, of churches, of nations.  God's rule is seen in the very person of Jesus, even in his birth. 

The contrasts between the royalty we see on earth, the Caesars, the Kings, the Emperors, the Presidents, the rulers of the present age, and the King of Kings born in Bethlehem are striking.  A royal birth would be accompanied by fanfare and festivities, parties and vigils.  Yes, Jesus has a fanfare, but to a few shepherds and a lowly family crowded into their relatives' home during a census.  The King is laid in a manger not a royal cradle.  He is hailed as the Savior of the World, countering the claim of Augustus that he was savior and lord and god.  Jesus is born on the frontier of the empire, not at the seat of power, but the backwaters.  Wright puts it this way.  "But the point Luke is making is clear.  The birth of this little boy is the beginning of a confrontation between the kingdom of God - and the kingdoms of the world.  Augustus never heard of Jesus of Nazareth.  But within a century or so his successors in Rome had not only heard of him; they were taking steps to obliterate his followers.  Within just over three centuries the Emperor himself became a Christian.  When you see the manger on a card or in church, don't stop at the crib.  See what it is pointing to.  It is pointing to the explosive truth that the baby lying there is already being spoken of as the true king of the world.  The rest of Luke's story, both in the gospel and, later on, in Acts, will tell how he comes into his kingdom."

Maybe the moral point is this: See in the humble coming of Jesus God's own values.  See his understanding of power and righteousness and justice and mercy and love.  Go beyond the sentimentality of the manger and see God's strategy for salvation.  It is the antithesis of the worldly kingdoms we are part of.

Well I've not said much.  But the point is, well, see the point beyond the manger.

Interpathy

Thought you would enjoy this observation by my friend Fyfe Blair in New Zealand.  You can read the context of this in his comments to MV101.b.  He's a thoughtful friend.  Check out his website at the right.

"Interpathy = an expansion of empathy relating to thinking with and
feeling with a person who is other to us. It is actually to step into and
genuinely be involved in the experience of the other and see from their
world view. Interpathy is cross cultural and so in terms of morals - is
this what Jesus is doing in relation to all alienated social moral groups
in his day, therefore what about us?"

Fyfe raises a great observation and thoughtful question.  The observation though I think should state: "This is what Jesus is doing."  Fyfe more humble than I am.  Also, the what about us? question is truly helpful.  Are we expressing interpathy in our Christian practice?

One of the things that must be said is that our sense of moral values will be better identified by what we do than what we say.  Praxis is the key to knowing what someone believes. 

Enjoy Dr. Blair's comments and his challenging questions.  This shows up under "missional church" because it is the attitude we must have to be missional in our ministry.